A Letter to Those Who Think Rankings Mean Anything At All

<p>I have seen on college confidential, including the Cornell Board, a sincere worship of the gods of USNWR and Businessweek rankings. It is disconcerting to see how many prospective students are deterred by how "relatively poor" we do on some of these rankings, and how many students who could care less about Cornell apply because they see we ranked in the top 10 for so and so program.</p>

<p>Let me implore you to read more about these rankings, especially the methodologies, before using them as any source of credible metric for judgment.</p>

<p>USNWR and Businessweek are magazines, which in case you have forgotten, are for profit businesses. Their primary objective is selling magazines, not providing an objective and accurate rating system for colleges. Take a look at their methodology and you can see that.</p>

<p>The first, and most highly weighted statistic for USNWR, the "peer assessment score". "The U.S. News ranking formula gives greatest weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school's undergraduate academic excellence. The peer assessment survey allows the top academics we consult—presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions—to account for intangibles such as faculty dedication to teaching. Each individual is asked to rate peer schools' academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). Those who don't know enough about a school to evaluate it fairly are asked to mark "don't know." Synovate, an opinion-research firm based near Chicago, in spring 2008 collected the data; of the 4,272 people who were sent questionnaires, 46 percent responded."</p>

<p>I am not sure that presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions of other schools know enough of the intricacies of any school to provide an accurate assessment of them. How would a dean of admission at school Alpha know about the "faculty dedication to teaching" at school Beta? On top of that, do you not think that the administrators at other colleges are strategic and calculating in their responses to these surveys? They know by trashing another school their ranking will go up, and they will have more applications and more money flowing through their school, and they use this information accordingly.</p>

<p>Second, "Retention (20 percent in national universities and liberal arts colleges and 25 percent in master's and baccalaureate colleges). The higher the proportion of freshmen who return to campus the following year and eventually graduate, the better a school is apt to be at offering the classes and services students need to succeed. This measure has two components: six-year graduation rate (80 percent of the retention score) and freshman retention rate (20 percent). The graduation rate indicates the average proportion of a graduating class who earn a degree in six years or less; we consider freshman classes that started from 1998 through 2001. Freshman retention indicates the average proportion of freshmen entering from 2003 through 2006 who returned the following fall."</p>

<p>For any rigorous university like Cornell, you will inevitably have lower retention rates than are "desirable" by USNWR. Your classes are meant to grade your merit of the material, and if you cannot stay up to par with the difficulty level of the classes here, you will be asked to kindly leave. Cornell is not meant to baby students with grade inflation, nor to hand out a degree to every person who walks through its doors, this is a place that unabashedly teaches and trains people for the work force and for life. </p>

<p>I will spare you all the counterpoints to every one of these metrics, but I ask of you to go through them with a discerning eye, and ask yourself whether each of these is valid in its assessments. Do not blindly accept these rankings as the truth, do your own research, and formulate your own opinions.</p>

<p>How</a> We Calculate the Rankings - US News and World Report</p>

<p>^-- totally agree.. i hate seeing post regarding cornell's ranking... I mean i do truly believe that cornell is a wonderful schol and i love it! thats y i am applying for it as a transfer! it has everything i can possibly imagine!</p>

<p>I don't really see how this applies to Cornell in particular.</p>

<p>I mean, it's not like MIT is a cakewalk.</p>

<p>^ Because Cornell is always called the "lowest ivy" and is compared to everywhere else because it's ranked sort-of low.</p>

<p>
[quote]
^ Because Cornell is always called the "lowest ivy" and is compared to everywhere else because it's ranked sort-of low.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's the basic stereotype harbored by the founder of the survey/ranking. This distorts the ranking automatically. The founder of the survey has said, "before I create this survey, I already knew that HYP will be ranked in the top three."</p>

<p>If you are really obsessed with ranking, at least pick a not-for-profit ranking created for purpose other than selling magazine/generating profit. Shanghai Jiao Tong University created a rather objective ranking respected by recruiters around the world to compare Chinese universities with those in other nations.</p>

<p><a href="http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2007/ARWU2007_Top100.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2007/ARWU2007_Top100.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>My point is, if you truly love to play the ranking game, at least pick a ranking that is as objective as possible.</p>

<p>Even a non-profit ranking like the one proposed by SJTU is not that objective, not to mention USWNR. Let's look at the methodology proposed by SJTU, which puts a bit of weight to the number of Nobel Prize and field medal winners. Being a nobel prize winner doesn't mean you can teach.</p>

<p>However, I like SJTU because it focuses on research. It ranks institutes primarily by the number of research articles produced, and by citations (bibliography, etc etc). I love this parts of the ranking. I do think this part of the ranking portrays a university best.</p>

<p>does sjtu rank by year? like # of paper produced in 2007 or w/e.</p>

<p>
[quote]
does sjtu rank by year? like # of paper produced in 2007 or w/e.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>SJTU publishes a ranking each year, and unlike USNWR ranking, SJTU's ranking usually has no change (not even minor changes). Think about it. If USNWR's ranking doesn't change, no one wants to buy it multiple times. SJTU's ranking has no such problem (it is not-for-profit).</p>

<p>By the way, I read "The Economist" very frequently, and the ranking it mentions in articles related to education is, unsurprisingly, SJTU's.</p>

<p>i feel like sjtu is biased towards research. notice how no small liberal arts colleges like amherst, williams, etc are on that list of "top" universities (even dartmouth isn't on it!)</p>

<p>rankings, in my mind, are only useful when you're focusing on specific majors/programs. say, if you're deciding between NYU's tisch and harvard for film, why would you ever pick harvard over NYU?</p>

<p>
[quote]
i feel like sjtu is biased towards research. notice how no small liberal arts colleges like amherst, williams, etc are on that list of "top" universities (even dartmouth isn't on it!)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It certainly is a research-oriented ranking, and that's undoubtedly one of the drawbacks of SJTU's ranking. And keep in mind that SJTU's ranking is only an accurate portrayal of the overall strength of a university's grad schools.</p>

<p>However, it is important to note that SJTU does focus on the humanities as well.</p>

<p>
[quote]
SCI. Total number of articles indexed in Science Citation Index-expanded, Social Science Citation Index, and Arts & Humanities Citation Index in 2004. Only publications of article type are considered. When calculating the total number of articles of an institution, a special weight of two was introduced for articles indexed in Social Science Citation Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
does sjtu rank by year? like # of paper produced in 2007 or w/e.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Sorry I misunderstood your question earlier.</p>

<p>The methodology used by SJTU is rather sophisticated. SJTU ranks by year. In the 2007 ranking, it bases the number of articles published between 2000 and 2004.</p>

<p>
[quote]
N&S. The number of articles published in Nature and Science between 2000 and 2004. To distinguish the order of author affiliation, a weight of 100% is assigned for corresponding author affiliation, 50% for first author affiliation (second author affiliation if the first author affiliation is the same as corresponding author affiliation), 25% for the next author affiliation, and 10% for other author affiliations. Only publications of article type are considered.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>ARWU (the proper initialism for the SJTU ranking) has two major, major problems.</p>

<p>First, it gives way too much emphasis on science related fields, probably because they're what Chinese companies and students are interested in and what Chinese companies and students excel in.</p>

<p>A second, more worrying problem, is the fact that if you use the methodologies and data claimed to be used by SJTU, you find that the scores that you come up with are not necessarily the scores that SJTU came up with.</p>

<p>(In my opinion, if UVA, Tufts and Emory rarely appear in the Top 100, while Penn State, Colorado and Minnesota - Twin Cities consistently appear in the top 50, as is the case with ARWU, you are doing something wrong. Personally, I usually use the THES-QS ranking - which admittedly are used by USNWR for their World Rankings - because I frequently want to compare international universities and, as someone with an interest in humanities and social sciences, find the ARWU science bias unhelpful, and the THES-QS also publishes field rankings in addition to general rankings.)</p>

<p>The latest AWRU rankings (FB posted a 2007 link) is here: Academic</a> Ranking of World Universities - 2008
The latest THES-QS rankings are here: QS</a> Top Universities - Official home of the THE - QS World University Rankings</p>

<p>Hehe when I first saw the THES-QS ranking I threw it aside. No way "PEKING University" can even be in top 100. :P</p>

<p>My dad laughed so hard when he read that ranking. XD We're Chinese and we know how hmm... incompetent Peking (Beijing) University is...</p>

<p>
[quote]
Chinese companies and students excel in.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>None of the Chinese universities is ranked in the top 100 in the SJTU ranking.</p>

<p>It is true that most Chinese corporations are not interested in the humanity aspects of the ranking though. I find it helpful to just simply based it on scientific research.</p>

<p>While its true no Chinese university is ranked in the top 100 of ARWU, a large number of Chinese students study in the United States and United Kingdom, and its for comparing international universities that an international ranking is necessary.</p>

<p>Quite honestly, when I first saw the ARWU, I thought they were insane. While THES-QS too has anomalies, most notably the number of British universities in the top ten, anomalies in the ARWU are both more shocking and more frequent.</p>